2014 (10) TMI 342 - AT - Service Tax

CESTAT allows appeal in lottery case under Section 65(19) Finance Act, 1994

The Appellate Tribunal CESTAT NEW DELHI allowed the appeal in a lottery business case, considering the explanation added to Section 65(19) of the Finance ... Service tax on activity of lottery business - Service Tax on the lottery business was not applicable before May 2008 - Held that:- period covered by adjudication was 1-7-2003 to 15-11-2003. Tribunal has advantage of reading the law laid down by Apex Court on the subject of implication of an explanation appearing as a substantive provision in statute book in the case of UOI v. Martin Lottery Agencies Ltd. - [2009 (5) TMI 1 - SUPREME COURT OF INDIA]. It has been held that by an explanation, a substantive law may also be introduced and if such law is introduced, it will have no retrospective effect. Tribunal at the stage of stay hearing holds good and gets support of law declared by Apex Court. Therefore, following the Apex Court decision in the case of Martin Lottery Agencies Ltd. (supra) - Decided in favour of assessee. The Appellate Tribunal CESTAT NEW DELHI allowed the appeal in a case related to lottery business. The Tribunal considered the implication of an explanation added to Section 65(19) of the Finance Act, 1994. The decision was influenced by the law laid down by the Apex Court in the case of UOI v. Martin Lottery Agencies Ltd. The Tribunal's view during the stay hearing was upheld, and the appeal was allowed based on the Apex Court decision.